Did you never have a religious leader growing up tell you "love the sinner, hate the sin"? Probably not since if you'd had a more religious background you'd probably be less hateful.
Born and raised Christian, still practicing and attending church.
Openly gay since i was a teenager. No issues there either.
Your point?
__________________ You’re just old hate balls.
--Funniest mod complaint in CP history.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MRCboicgy For This Useful Post:
Probably not since if you'd had a more religious background you'd probably be less hateful.
Has anyone thought of introducing this "religious background" you speak of to the middle east? From what I understand there is a lot of hateful viewpoints in that point of the world, and a good religious up-bringing would surely bring that to an end.
The Following User Says Thank You to Moose For This Useful Post:
I have no problem with religions forbidding gay marriage.
The state can allow it, then the separate church can decide what it preaches to its flock and practices in its own ritual/practices.
I think the state, the government, as an elected body representing ALL citizens should act in the interests of ALL, and if people have their own religion to use as their own "moral compass" that is their own prerogative.
I feel that allowing gay marriage does nothing to hurt/harm/threaten the rights of anyone, in fact it grants more equal rights, therefore, it should be allowed.
If you don't believe in it, don't do it, don't like it, but don't start drifting into hate speech either - your objections are your own, and you have no more right to criticize or vilify someone based on their sexual preference than on their gender, ethnicity, age, etc
morality from religion can be positive in terms of law - i.e. thou shalt not kill. but when you start getting into territory that is not universally professed, you need to be careful to separate law from individual or related religion's positions.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Imported_Aussie For This Useful Post:
Why does this issue even come up?
Why do homosexuals care to be included in an institution that is basically derived from religion? And why do heterosexuals care so much?
This sort of thing takes place in the bedroom. You either partake in the act in a hetero or homosexual way. Why should people have to put up with gay people parading (pardon the pun) and demanding rights that are bestowed upon two people by a religious institution that does not acknowledge homosexuals to begin with?
Why does this issue even come up?
Why do homosexuals care to be included in an institution that is basically derived from religion? And why do heterosexuals care so much?
This sort of thing takes place in the bedroom. You either partake in the act in a hetero or homosexual way. Why should people have to put up with gay people parading (pardon the pun) and demanding rights that are bestowed upon two people by a religious institution that does not acknowledge homosexuals to begin with?
Simply put, legal rights. Same reason someone I met got married after a decade of living common law. He was transfered from Alberta to a state in the US that didn't recognize it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
Thats why Flames fans make ideal Star Trek fans. We've really been taught to embrace the self-loathing and extreme criticism.
Why does the white man care about the negro's rights?
Maybe, just maybe, there's something beyond self-interest.
__________________
"For thousands of years humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings are pulled by a god or gods, unseen and inscrutable." - Carl Sagan Freedom consonant with responsibility.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to evman150 For This Useful Post:
Why does this issue even come up? Why do homosexuals care to be included in an institution that is basically derived from religion? And why do heterosexuals care so much?
This sort of thing takes place in the bedroom. You either partake in the act in a hetero or homosexual way. Why should people have to put up with gay people parading (pardon the pun) and demanding rights that are bestowed upon two people by a religious institution that does not acknowledge homosexuals to begin with?
I'm pretty sure it's not derived from religion, it's cultural.
Quote:
Most ancient societies needed a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species,a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights, and the protection of bloodlines. The institution of marriage handled these needs. For instance, ancient Hebrew law required a man to become the husband of a deceased brother's widow.
but let the religious bigots carry on with their misplaced ideas
Exactly ... our society recognizes the instution of marriage and is structured in such a way that it's quite important. Hospital visitation rights, patient care rights, tax breaks, etc. etc. It's a big deal. It's not just a piece of paper.
Exactly ... our society recognizes the instution of marriage and is structured in such a way that it's quite important. Hospital visitation rights, patient care rights, tax breaks, etc. etc. It's a big deal. It's not just a piece of paper.
That's true for now but I can see that changing in the future.
Marriage is going the way of a lot of things in our society these days. It's just big business.
Marriage is a legal partnership, as mentioned above. Even if same sex marriage is legalized (as it is in Canada) it doesn't mean a religious institution has to perform a ceremony. It means according to the government you are in a partnership and share numerous rights.
If you think it's just a piece of paper, ask anyone that's divorced or a divorce attorney about this "piece of paper".
Additionally, all religions aren't against same sex marriage. In fact many Christian religions support same sex marriage (the United Church for example).
There are Biblical scholars that believe the Bible says nothing about homosexuals and any passage that is quoted is a misinterpretation. Sodomy actually has to deal with the treatment of others, a man shall not lie with another man for that is detestful is a closing line to encompass male family members and not males in general (remember the book was translated umpteen hundread years ago, so applying today's English rhetoric isn't going to work smoothly). Just to be clear I am not a Biblical scholar, but I am just passing along information I have come across.
That said, if you don't support same sex marriage you don't have to. No one is forcing you to go out in the streets and march for equality. It's not really any different from a Catholic priest refusing to marry a Catholic and a non-Catholic (I use the Catholic Church only because it's a definitive example off the top of my head, many priests do marry inter-denominationally, such as the one that married my parents who both practice different religions). Or a church refusing to marry a white and black person. If you don't support inter-religious or inter-racial marriage you don't have to.
I personally think it's a horrible idea to marry someone who cheers for another sports team than you do, but I'm not going to tell anyone here "If you're a Flames fan, it should be illegal for you to marry a Canucks fan". That's just silly (even if true).
__________________ "Calgary Flames is the best team in all the land" - My Brainwashed Son
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
The legal/tax rights are huge though and shouldn't be discounted. If I die the all my investments, property and everything rolls over to my wife tax free. We can split pensions, share health benefits and all those things as well.
The fight for gay marriage isn't just the "piece of paper" or recognition of the sanctity in front of god (if that's your belief). It's about applying all of the other major benefits in an equal and just manner.
A lot of us on this board are too young to see the ramifications of this in action, but on death the marriage/common-law contract is huge in terms of dollars. The ramifications for gays and lesbians can mean that homes and businesses are sold because their partner dies and they have no choice, where a hetero-sexual couple in the exact same circumstance doesn't have that issue.
Anyway, I usually steer way clear of these threads. I don't want to argue the morality of these relationships (most of you can guess if you see me in other threads anyway!). I just wanted to note a few of the reasons why this is a much bigger issue than the theological discusssions.
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Slava For This Useful Post:
